A group of House Republicans introduced a bill Thursday to audit the funds that Congress has approved to spend on the war in Ukraine.
The effort is being led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and supported by a group of Republicans that have been critical of US aid to Ukraine. The resolution’s cosponsors include Reps. Thomas Massie (KY), Matt Gaetz (FL), Barry Moore (AL), Andrew Clyde (GA), and Cory Mills, a representative-elect from Florida.
According to The Hill, Greene introduced the bill as a privileged resolution, meaning it will be sent to the relevant committee, which will have 14 business days to either reject the legislation or approve it for a vote on the House floor.
If the bill is not discussed by the committee within 14 days, Greene has the option to force a House vote. Greene said she’s prepared to reintroduce the bill in the next Congress when Republicans have a majority in the House.
“I’ll introduce this resolution again, but I’ll also be calling for a full audit. We voted ‘no’ to send money over there, but we’re also going to audit what’s happening in Ukraine,” Greene said.
While most Republicans still support spending on the war in Ukraine, many have come out in favor of increasing oversight of the aid. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who is expected to be the speaker in the next Congress, has said a Republican-controlled House wouldn’t send a “blank check” to Ukraine.
McCarthy later downplayed his comments and said the lack of oversight was the issue, and other Republican leaders insisted they would keep arming Ukraine. But McCarthy’s comments were still enough to prompt a push to approve a massive new Ukraine aid package before the next Congress is sworn in, and the White House has asked for $37.7 billion.
If the new aid package is approved, it will bring total US spending on a proxy war on Russia’s border to about $105 billion. If it’s spent at the rate of other aid packages, the White House will likely be looking for more come spring.
66 thoughts on “House Republicans Introduce Resolution to Audit Ukraine Aid”
Aid to Ukraine will continue. Maybe with some additional oversight, but it will continue. The US will not abandon the people of Ukraine.
…until US policy kills them all.
The last I saw it was the Russians killing the Ukrainians.
“The last I saw it was the Russians killing the Ukrainians.”
Last I saw the US policy continues to resist stepped up negotiation to end the killing – hence Congress shutting up even a mild letter suggesting all means – vs military support ‘to the last Ukrainian’ only – be used to end the killing.
Sure, blame the US for Russia attacking and killing Ukrainians. Regardless of what the US did, Russia attacked Ukraine. They are on Ukraine land killing Ukrainians and bombing Ukraine cities. That is an uncontestable fact.
There are a lot of “uncontestable” facts. You just refuse to acknoweledge any of them that the US did since the cold war ended.
What “I refuse to acknowledge” does not change that fact that Russia invaded Ukraine.
And if you put the things that you refuse to acknowledge next to the fact Russia invaded, it should become apparent that they were provoked. Notice the writers always adding the “inevitability” to their articles. No US provocations, no war. Simple as that.
“blame the US for Russia attacking and killing Ukrainians.”
Mainstream antiwar organizations a) condemn Russia’s illegal invasion and demand it gets out; and b) demand the US/NATO negotiates a settlement vs. its ‘military action only’ policy.
I belong to one of those organizations, and every Saturday collect ‘Russia out/negotiations now’ letter signatures.
In my post:
I “blamed” the US for prolonging the war by resisting negotiation from the start – a policy that will kill more Ukrainian and Russian kids ‘to the last Ukrainian.’
I “blamed” the US for undemocratically silencing calls for greater negotiation – vs. a purely military response – when majorities poll as wanting more negotiation.
Would that be part of our “rules based order” after we attacked Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya?
The Ukrainians were “killing his own people” (like they used against Saddam), as a justification for the invasion of Iraq (killing more than Saddam could have dreamt of).
The US has always abandoned the people it uses for its wars. It will treat Ukraine the same as it did Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, South Sudan, and many more.
The point of an audit is to show whether the money is being spent as intended, and to stop losses caused by inefficiency and/or fraud.
The issue could soon become critical because military hardware can be used by Ukraine, Russia, unprincipled British forces, and anyone with access through the black market from deliberately or accidentally setting off false flag incidents.
When did we adopt them?
Roughly about February 28 2022.
Good comment. Until the last sentence. In my best John McEnroe voice: YOU CAN”T BE SERIOUS!
You’re a comedian, right? Your masters started this war. They don’t give a flying fuсk about our people.
America has no vested interest in Ukraine. Just another attempt to start a forever war to further enrich the AMIC and the politicians recieving grift for keeping it going.
“America has no vested interest in Ukraine. Just another attempt to start a forever war to further enrich the AMIC.”
True – but – as w/Russiagate – I’d argue the Democratic war party is also weaponizing a ‘foreign policy’ issue for domestic political gain – for both controlling its progressive flank, and attacking supposedly ‘Putin-Trump-loving’ Republicans.
It is Biden vs Trump, not Ukraine vs Russia, that drives much of the support for the war. Just say “Hunter Biden” or “Vindman” and watch the fireworks “about Ukraine.”
Not at all unlikely. For sure it won’t be a real audit.
We get to take Russia down for almost no cost, in Pentagon terms.
“House Republicans Introduce Resolution to Audit Ukraine Aid Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene led the effort and said she’s willing to reintroduce the legislation in the next Congress”
Wait until the real story comes out! Crime families in America Biden, Clinton, and obama will eventually face prosecution and worse!
>eventually face prosecution and worse!
Right after GW Bush and Cheney go to the Hague!
Not that I don’t share your sentiments, but the political class will never get its comeuppance.
I wish this would happen, but I am not holding my breath that justice will come to any of the neocon/liberal cabals.
I really wish. But no, I don’t believe. Power protects power. The only potential risk now is to Trump, and that is because of his loss of power and popularity, not because of anything different he did or did not do about wars.
Thinker please give us a sneak preview of Your “Real Story”
Not about me. This week the FTX story dropped including laundering funds for American Democrats and some Republicans. Delicious!
I keep hearing the term “laundering funds,” but I have yet to see evidence for the claim. Do you happen to know of any?
Try many of the Youtube sources covering the FTX scandal and funneling back to Congress.
In other words, no, you don’t know of any.
In what alternative universe is Taylor-Greene the voice of reason? 😳
“We voted ‘no’ to send money over there, (Ukraine)”
…. republican MTG
wow even broken clocks are right once a day.
i have a feeling that once any aid money actually reaches ukraine then it would be out of reach of any uncle sam audit.
“wow even broken clocks are right once a day.” LOL. That statement is “twice a day”.
In her case the correct statement would be an exaggeration.
those are republican clocks so they are only right once a day
Well in that case, they are always “right”. LOL
The objective of the war from US point of view was to weaken Russia. One has to wonder who is being weakened.
Well the Russians have lost a lot more tanks then we haven lot more troops than we have.
Many of the same sorts of cheating, stealing, and diversion to the black market happened over and over again, from Vietnam to Afghanistan.
So is it happening this time too? Well, Ukraine before the war was said even by the US to be the most corrupt country in Europe. Wartime conditions and shortcuts are unlikely to have improved that.
Examples that recur: 1) commanders overstate the strength of units, understate the losses, and then continue to collect the pay and weapons and ammo for the extra men, keeping the money and selling the stuff on the black market; 2) “guards” of vast dumps of stuff find ways to sell some off the books (in small ways that happens even inside US weapons storage here at home).
The US has given Ukraine just about 2x as much money as the entire Russian yearly military budget… And they’re still losing badly… Do we really think we can continue our uni polar world?
“Ukraine is losing badly” is pretty much the same quality of statement as “Russia is losing badly.” Or, as MacBeth would put it, “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Would “Ukraine is losing goodly”, pass muster?
“Both sides are losing” would be accurate.
But the war is taking place in Ukraine. So, they are losing just more than military assets. Unfortunately.
In some ways, all sides always lose in wars. However, in terms of the “traditional” ways military victory and defeat are judged, It ain’t over ’til it’s over and we won’t be able to judge until it is.
Taking a snapshot today, the only thing we can see with clarity is the real estate picture. There, Ukraine has lost significant territory, which Russia has gained (and Ukraine and its allies are the ones who trumpet every hectare of ground Kiev recaptures).
I think the chances of Ukraine recovering the Donbas republics and Crimea are vanishingly small and the same is true for whatever parts of the land bridge in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson Russia sees as essential.
It’s not unreasonable to expect that neither belligerent will achieve all its goals — that’s how these things usually work out — and it’s fairly reasonable to expect that Russia will achieve at least some of what it set out to accomplish, while it’s much less likely Ukraine will do that.
But we shall see. When it’s over.
The Ukrainian regime didn’t have the Donbas republics and Crimea prior to February of 2022. They hadn’t had them for eight years. So “recovering” them wouldn’t seem necessary to “winning.”
If the Russians can secure LPR, DPR, and possibly that land corridor, they have a plausible claim to “victory” — but it will have cost them, and will continue to cost them, in various ways, and it’s not obvious that the game will have been worth the candle, depending on whose interests are being evaluated.
If the Ukrainians can recover Kherson and Zaporizhia (aside from, possibly, that land corridor), they also have a plausible claim to “victory,” insofar as they were fighting a much larger and theoretically more powerful opponent that most people expected to walk right over them and take whatever it wanted in short order.
World Wars 1 and 2 seem to have conditioned people to regard victory/defeat as a matter of unconditional surrender and/or regime change. Most wars don’t actually end like that. They end in ceasefires that may or may not last, with neither side having achieved everything it wanted to achieve, sometimes with a perceived “winner” and “loser,” but often with two “losers” and another war obviously coming in the future.
A lot of supporters of the Russian side keep quacking about how the Russians are going to roll over the Ukrainians to the Polish border REAL SOON NOW JUST YOU WAIT. Personally, not only do I not think that will happen, I don’t think it was ever the intention.
Zelensky and his spokespeople have repeatedly and emphatically insisted that Ukraine’s goals include, at the top of the list, recovery of those territories.
Obviously, Russia will evaluate the worth of the costs in terms of the value in terms of its own interests. It’s a very structured and orderly government. Unlike the West*, I expect Russia has plans B through F ready to execute and planners and think tanks working on additional alternatives.
I don’t think it was ever the intention either. And I don’t think it will happen unless US-NATO makes it unaffordably difficult for Russia to achieve its goals without doing that. However, I think Russia is perfectly capable of rolling over all of Ukraine if it decides to do so, and I don’t think US_NATO could stop it from doing that without starting WWIII.
* RAND may well be doing its version of that analysis here, but it stays in business by never really committing to any options. And the Pentagon’s internal experts almost certainly want to avoid the tough questions as much as possible. If they were in charge this wouldn’t be happening, because they know Ukraine can’t win and NATO couldn’t win a land war against Russia in eastern Europe without existentially-dangerous escalation.
“Zelensky and his spokespeople have repeatedly and emphatically insisted that Ukraine’s goals include, at the top of the list, recovery of those territories.”
And Putin and his spokespeople have repeatedly and emphatically insisted that Russia’s goals include “de-Nazification and de-militarization” of Ukraine, aka regime change.
Like Mick Jagger sang, “you can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you find you get what you need.”
Every war starts out with the belligerents calling for, effectively, unconditional surrender in which they achieve all of their objectives and their opponents achieve none.
But that’s the exception, not the rule, in war.
Usually, some of each side’s objectives eventually go either on the table to be negotiated away, or under the table to remain future points of disagreement, conflict, and maybe even renewed war.
I expect the latter in this case. I expect Putin to present Zelenskyy with a “facts on the ground” fait accompli — LPR/DPR and possibly a land corridor to Crimea secured, Russian troops in defensible positions to maintain those things, and a unilateral ceasefire . That would shift responsibility from Putin for initially invading Ukraine to Zelenskyy for continuing a war that can be stopped, or at least paused. And it would allow both sides to face-savingly claim some measure of “victory.”
The evidence so far seems to indicated that for the Russian forces to take, say, Kiev and Odessa would require a far larger mobilization, and it’s questionable whether even that would get the job done. Russian forces, equipment, and military doctrine do not seem to have successfully scaled up from things like the quick romp in Georgia to a major conflict.
Whatever the reasons for that, and they’re probably multiple and systemic, it’s the kind of “back to the drawing board” situation that’s better conducted after finding a way to end, or at least freeze, the conflict in which you became aware of the problems. Stalin managed to get it all figured out and prevail versus Hitler with that war ongoing, but buying the time to get it right cost him a lot of lives, land, and equipment.
According to latest report from DPR front lines, there are no Ukrainians there. Only foreign grunts.
Anglo-American empire is losing this conflict. Just as planned and expected.
By loosing badly you mean steadily winning back the territory lost in the first days of the war?
Does Marge know the Don said this:
“The Fake News Media refuses to report that I was the one who very early and strongly gave the anti-tank busters (Javelins) to Ukraine, while Obama/Biden was giving blankets, to great and open complaints,’ he said in a statement.”
“Then Biden came in, and canceled the remaining military equipment that was packed, loaded, and ready to be shipped. Now the Fake News Media is trying to say that Trump gave Ukraine nothing and it was Biden who is their great friend and gave them weaponry. The dishonesty is so unbelievable. All I can do is report it!”
this is just another publicity stunt for MTG. But Biden has to be told that he can’t start a war that nobody wanted without consequences.
I wish. But he can start a war. He did.
My point is that there should be consequences for that.
It would also be nice if the public could see which palms are being greased in Taiwan.
You may have noticed all the greasy characters running around Congress? A this point there is so much money floating around it isn’t just palms that are getting greased it’s entire bodies.
Another 37 billion taxpayer dollars for an unauthorized war, not formally agreed to by the people who finance this corrupt Piece of Scheiß government.
Revolting. Vote democratic? They’re worse than the republicans who backed Dubya’s phony invasions, etc. A real audit of where these weapons are going in a country that still crawls with graft has been totally missing. Eventually we’ll see organized terrorists using our weapons against civilian air and other infrastructure.
The people who hatched this abomination should be institutionalized.
What war? We have many more US troops in Syria than in Ukraine.
The war that wouldn’t have happened without the US. That war.
The swamp doesn’t want any audit of the money they’re stealing from the American people
Auditing corruption? I rather take my chance playing state lottery.
Anyone who doubts the need to audit or oversee the funds going to Ukraine should go to C-SPAN and search for segments by the Inspector General to the Afghanistan war. According to him, there were billions and billions that were essentially urinated onto the sands of Afghanistan and Iraq. John Sopko is his name.
Comments are closed.